list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around Marley & Me on Spout Copyright 2005-9 Spout, LLC Spout RSS http://www.spout.com/images/SpoutLogoRSS.jpg http://www.spout.com/ 136 30 http://www.spout.com/films/Marley_Me/345697/default.aspx Title: Marley & Me
Year: 2008
Director: David Frankel
Plot: Owen Wilson and Jennifer Aniston go to the dogs with Marley & Me, a tale of a couple forced to deal with a troublesome Labrador retriever. The Devil Wears Prada's David Frankel directs the adaptation of John Grogan's best-seller by screenwriters Scott Frank and Don Roos. Alan Arkin and Eric Dane co-star in the Fox 2000 production. ~ Jeremy Wheeler, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 18
Number of Lists: 7
Number of blog posts: 5
Number of discussion threads: 5
SpoutRating: 3
]]>Tue, 14 Jul 2009 07:37:22 GMTMarley & Me2008David Frankel<a href="http://www.spout.com/players/P___200996/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Owen Wilson</a> and <a href="http://www.spout.com/players/P_____1831/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Jennifer Aniston</a> go to the dogs with Marley & Me, a tale of a couple forced to deal with a troublesome Labrador retriever. <a href="http://www.spout.com/films/269878/detail.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>The Devil Wears Prada</a>'s David Frankel directs the adaptation of John Grogan's best-seller by screenwriters Scott Frank and <a href="http://www.spout.com/players/P___167026/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Don Roos</a>. <a href="http://www.spout.com/players/P____79913/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Alan Arkin</a> and <a href="http://www.spout.com/players/P___269996/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Eric Dane</a> co-star in the Fox 2000 production. ~ Jeremy Wheeler, All Movie Guide18Tag Target (>10)7553http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/s345697.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/Marley_Me/345697/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/blogs/digby00/archive/2009/3/18/41113.aspx Post By: digby00
Post To: digby00 Blog
Post Date: 3/18/2009 11:55:47 AM
Body: I am a sucker for a movie about dog, especially cute, nervous, overly excited puppies that turn into cute, nervous, overly excited dogs. I really liked Grogan's "Marley and Me" when I read it last summer but its hard to say which version was better. The book flowed really well and only took about a day to read but did a great job of keeping me entertained. As can be expected, some elements in the film version were altered, non-existent, or overly exaggerated, which I think is unfortunate and I just can't see the point because all the scenes in the book were so fitting and genuine. Read the rest of this critic's review here
]]>Wed, 18 Mar 2009 15:55:47 GMTdigby00digby00 Blog3/18/2009 11:55:47 AMI am a sucker for a movie about dog, especially cute, nervous, overly excited puppies that turn into cute, nervous, overly excited dogs. I really liked Grogan's "Marley and Me" when I read it last summer but its hard to say which version was better. The book flowed really well and only took about a day to read but did a great job of keeping me entertained. As can be expected, some elements in the film version were altered, non-existent, or overly exaggerated, which I think is unfortunate and I just can't see the point because all the scenes in the book were so fitting and genuine. Read the rest of this critic's review here http://www.spout.com/blogs/christhilk/archive/2009/3/18/41110.aspx Post By: ChrisThilk
Post To: ChrisThilk Blog
Post Date: 3/18/2009 9:01:22 AM
Body: When the movie was about to come out you probably weren’t able to go anywhere or watch anything without encountering an ad for Marley & Me. The ads played up the antics of the dog whose name is featured in the title or, because it was coming out around Christmas, showed you a cute little puppy with a bow around his neck. The campaign caught a lot of flack after the movie opened because it’s very much not a “cute dog” movie that’s great for the whole family but instead features a bevy of very adult issues and themes. And that’s what I really dug about Marley & Me. Jennifer Aniston and Owen Wilson play a young married couple whose life we’re following through a handful of very real moments both good and bad. From the enthusiasm of starting their life together through the tragedy of miscarriage to the joy of starting a family to struggling with jobs and self-identification issues, these are all moments that a lot of people have gone through. To their credit, Aniston and Wilson do their level best to not be overshadowed by the dog or the kids and not only do the pair provide some laughs but also some very real drama. There are a handful of those expected “cute dog” moments within the movie but they’re honestly few and far between. More often than not, actually, the kinds of antics the dog engages in that in other movies would be played for laughs are in this one used to move the story along by providing a point of tension and/or bonding between the humans in the film. That’s a pretty unique role for the dog - which is setup to be the focal point of the movie - to play and it’s a credit to the screenwriters that they managed to create a movie that works as more than fluffy entertainment. I’m not saying Marley & Me is a cutting portrait of disillusionment. It’s not. The characters - based on real people since the movie is based on a non-fiction book about life with and around this unruly dog - are more or less optimistic and use the tragedies and hardships they face as launching pads for doing it better the next time. So if you’re into dark character studies that deconstruct the suburban mythos you’ll be disappointed. But it also doesn’t shy away from showing that life, even with a larger-than life mess of a dog, isn’t always sunshine and flowers. The DVD release of Marley & Me comes with a whole batch of bonus features that range from pretty interesting to mildly entertaining fluff. Deleted Scenes - Pretty self explanitory. Nothing relevatory here but there are some interesting character moments. Gag Reel - Not the traditional gag reel you might expect. This is a pretty highly polished montage of people mugging for the camera. Finding Marley - The search for the dog. Breaking the Golden Rule - Wilson and Aniston discuss breaking the rules about never working with animals and/or babies. On the Set with Marley - About working with the dog. Animal Adoption - Again, you can guess what this is about. Purina Dog Chow videos - A couple features about a video contest Purina, a promotional partner in the movie’s marketing and featured prominently in the movie, ran when the movie was about to hit theaters. When Not to Pee - Yep. Trailers I have to say I was more than pleasantly surprised by Marley & Me. I expected a mildly entertaining romantic comedy, but the realistic portrait of struggles of the characters that the movie actually contains wound up being not only far more entertaining but far more interesting than I presumed it to be. Originally posted on:Chris Thilk
]]>Wed, 18 Mar 2009 13:01:22 GMTChrisThilkChrisThilk Blog3/18/2009 9:01:22 AMWhen the movie was about to come out you probably weren’t able to go anywhere or watch anything without encountering an ad for Marley & Me. The ads played up the antics of the dog whose name is featured in the title or, because it was coming out around Christmas, showed you a cute little puppy with a bow around his neck. The campaign caught a lot of flack after the movie opened because it’s very much not a “cute dog” movie that’s great for the whole family but instead features a bevy of very adult issues and themes. And that’s what I really dug about Marley & Me. Jennifer Aniston and Owen Wilson play a young married couple whose life we’re following through a handful of very real moments both good and bad. From the enthusiasm of starting their life together through the tragedy of miscarriage to the joy of starting a family to struggling with jobs and self-identification issues, these are all moments that a lot of people have gone through. To their credit, Aniston and Wilson do their level best to not be overshadowed by the dog or the kids and not only do the pair provide some laughs but also some very real drama. There are a handful of those expected “cute dog” moments within the movie but they’re honestly few and far between. More often than not, actually, the kinds of antics the dog engages in that in other movies would be played for laughs are in this one used to move the story along by providing a point of tension and/or bonding between the humans in the film. That’s a pretty unique role for the dog - which is setup to be the focal point of the movie - to play and it’s a credit to the screenwriters that they managed to create a movie that works as more than fluffy entertainment. I’m not saying Marley & Me is a cutting portrait of disillusionment. It’s not. The characters - based on real people since the movie is based on a non-fiction book about life with and around this unruly dog - are more or less optimistic and use the tragedies and hardships they face as launching pads for doing it better the next time. So if you’re into dark character studies that deconstruct the suburban mythos you’ll be disappointed. But it also doesn’t shy away from showing that life, even with a larger-than life mess of a dog, isn’t always sunshine and flowers. The DVD release of Marley & Me comes with a whole batch of bonus features that range from pretty interesting to mildly entertaining fluff. Deleted Scenes - Pretty self explanitory. Nothing relevatory here but there are some interesting character moments. Gag Reel - Not the traditional gag reel you might expect. This is a pretty highly polished montage of people mugging for the camera. Finding Marley - The search for the dog. Breaking the Golden Rule - Wilson and Aniston discuss breaking the rules about never working with animals and/or babies. On the Set with Marley - About working with the dog. Animal Adoption - Again, you can guess what this is about. Purina Dog Chow videos - A couple features about a video contest Purina, a promotional partner in the movie’s marketing and featured prominently in the movie, ran when the movie was about to hit theaters. When Not to Pee - Yep. Trailers I have to say I was more than pleasantly surprised by Marley & Me. I expected a mildly entertaining romantic comedy, but the realistic portrait of struggles of the characters that the movie actually contains wound up being not only far more entertaining but far more interesting than I presumed it to be. Originally posted on:Chris Thilk http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2009/3/13/41014.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 3/13/2009 3:00:43 PM
Body: Even if you love the original Escape to Witch Mountain, you have to welcome a remake. The 1975 sci-fi Disney film has some very dated special effects — though the visible wires used to “levitate” a handgun and a harmonica give it a campy charm — and it’s not exactly the well-respected classic that The Black Hole or Old Yeller is, anyway. So, better a remake (or “modern re-imagining”) of a slightly beloved movie, which has already been redone once, to give The Rock another fulfillment of his Disney contract and utilize all the “perfect” digital effects now available. While it seems that eventually all Disney live-action classics will be remade, potentially rendering obsolete the careers of Dean Jones, Kevin Corcoran and those ugly kids from Mary Poppins, there are some that may, like Witch Mountain, deserve to be recycled. Disney has previously erred in reworking films like The Absent-Minded Professor (Robin Williams is no Fred MacMurray) and The Shaggy Dog (Tim Allen is no MacMurray, either, nor even is he Tommy Kirk), and it’s mistakenly producing new versions of Swiss Family Robinson and 20,000 Leauges Under the Sea. But there are so many other films, most forgotten, that would better lend themselves to remakes. Here we’ve selected 10 such classics, all but one live-action features, and we welcome you to suggest any others you may wish to see updated and/or re-imagined. The Apple Dumpling Gang (1975) With the western genre not quite dead anymore, it would be nice for Disney to bring back the comedy western. Of course, The Apple Dumpling Gang could be modernized, too. Either way, the story of three orphan children who enlist two bumbling bank robbers to steal their gold nugget would delight a new generation of kids who might not necessarily appreciate Don Knotts the way we did. Cast Jim Carrey in the Knotts role and Jack Black as his partner (originally played by Tim Conway), have them try to outdo each other’s slapstick performance, and you’ve got a huge family hit. The Black Cauldron (1985) This animated feature was so unpopular that it pretty much ruined the reputation of Walt Disney Pictures for a few years. Rated PG, and way too dark even for the studio that brought us Pinocchio, the adaptation of Lloyd Alexander’s fantasy novel had initially been threatened with a PG-13 or R rating. Nearly 25 years later, kids are a little tougher and could easily tolerate a live-action version that’s somewhere akin to Lord of the Rings, Pirates of the Caribbean and The Phantom Menace (a CGI “Gurgi” would be very similar to Jar-Jar Binks). Tim Burton should obviously direct the film, because he worked as an artist on the original, and he’s currently working for Disney anyway. The Cat from Outer Space (1978) Few people seem to hold this movie in high regards, despite audience’s apparent favor for talking animals and stupid sci-fi plots. But a modernized telling of a feline alien’s visit to Earth could be a blockbuster by being even worse than the original. Add more slapstick (in an LOLCats sort of way) and more special effects and this could make even more money than E.T., which seriously seemed derivative of The Cat from Outer Space anyway. And after this becomes a hit, Disney should continue digging in its catbox and remake the very strange and very obscure Three Lives of Thomasina. Darby O’Gill and the Little People (1959) If Hollywood can dare redo Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory, then Disney can surely remake Darby O’Gill and the Little People without too much protest. And like Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, this remake shall retain the source novel’s title. Of course, Darby O’Gill and the Good People does sound a little plain, so maybe getting right to the idea with Darby O’Gill and the Leprechauns as a title would be better. In any event, Sean Connery should come out of retirement to switch roles and play the titular old man who meets a bunch of Leprechauns. And perhaps Daniel Craig for Connery’s original role? Okay, new title: James Bond and the Other James Bond in Little People Are Forever (or Little People Never Die, or some other combo of 007 title referencing Leprechaun’s immortality). If this does well, Disney can also go ahead and redo the little-people-filled The Gnome-Mobile. In Search of the Castaways (1962) Here’s the genius idea Hollywood’s been seeking for almost 50 years: remake the Jules Verne adaptation In Search of the Castaways, a musical adventure with tons of disaster film elements and a perfect role for Miley Cyrus (isn’t she this generation’s Hayley Mills, in a way?), who could sing a new version of “Castaway.” The ice slide scene would be great in 3-D, by the way. Midnight Madness (1980) Remaking this cult classic might upset a few fans, but even those of us who love the original should be able to appreciate an updated version if it’s done right. There could always be more scavenger hunt movies, whether they’re fresh or recycled. And if Disney can find enough good, young character actors to fill the teams, nobody should even miss Eddie Deezen, David Naughton or Stephen Furst. Have Judd Apatow produce the thing and cast all his regulars, for instance. Paul Reubens (Pee-Wee Herman) should reprise his role, though. The Million Dollar Duck (1971) This family comedy about a duck that lays golden eggs is not very good, and it probably didn’t help its box office that a better film featuring golden-egg-laying fowl (Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory) opened on the very same day. But a good remake of bad movie isn’t a bad idea, and in this economy the story of a struggling family that gets a burst of financial luck (via strange science) might work as a relevant fantasy. Toby Tyler, or Ten Weeks with a Circus (1960) This forgotten Kevin Corcoran + monkey classic is kind of like Coraline, but there’s more circus stuff, the kid’s parents don’t suck (though he’s told they don’t love him), there’s a primate friend instead of a talking cat (though both animals are classic Disney devices) and it’s live-action and not 3-D. Do children still dream of running away to the circus? If not, then a remake of this movie could both reinstate that wish and present it as a terrible substitute for a real family all in the course of 90 minutes. The Ugly Dachshund (1966) Between the success of Marley and Me and news of an upcoming Marmaduke movie, it may just be the perfect time for a remake of a movie about a disastrous Great Dane who thinks he’s a little wiener dog. Put Brad Pitt and Anglina Jolie in the Dean Jones and Suzanne Pleshette roles and you’ll really, really piss off Team Jennifer by out-grossing last Christmas’ biggest hit. The World’s Greatest Athlete (1973) The story of an African who is brought to the U.S. to be a college track star may not seem like a big idea for a movie in the 21st century. But make that African a Tarzan-like white kid who can outrun a cheetah (and who isn’t The Flash) and you’ll have people laughing your film out of theaters. Or, you’ll somehow have a monster hit. Either way, we wish Disney would have the balls to remake this unrealistic movie, especially if they can get Usain Bolt to be the protagonist’s main competition. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Fri, 13 Mar 2009 19:00:43 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com3/13/2009 3:00:43 PMEven if you love the original Escape to Witch Mountain, you have to welcome a remake. The 1975 sci-fi Disney film has some very dated special effects — though the visible wires used to “levitate” a handgun and a harmonica give it a campy charm — and it’s not exactly the well-respected classic that The Black Hole or Old Yeller is, anyway. So, better a remake (or “modern re-imagining”) of a slightly beloved movie, which has already been redone once, to give The Rock another fulfillment of his Disney contract and utilize all the “perfect” digital effects now available. While it seems that eventually all Disney live-action classics will be remade, potentially rendering obsolete the careers of Dean Jones, Kevin Corcoran and those ugly kids from Mary Poppins, there are some that may, like Witch Mountain, deserve to be recycled. Disney has previously erred in reworking films like The Absent-Minded Professor (Robin Williams is no Fred MacMurray) and The Shaggy Dog (Tim Allen is no MacMurray, either, nor even is he Tommy Kirk), and it’s mistakenly producing new versions of Swiss Family Robinson and 20,000 Leauges Under the Sea. But there are so many other films, most forgotten, that would better lend themselves to remakes. Here we’ve selected 10 such classics, all but one live-action features, and we welcome you to suggest any others you may wish to see updated and/or re-imagined. The Apple Dumpling Gang (1975) With the western genre not quite dead anymore, it would be nice for Disney to bring back the comedy western. Of course, The Apple Dumpling Gang could be modernized, too. Either way, the story of three orphan children who enlist two bumbling bank robbers to steal their gold nugget would delight a new generation of kids who might not necessarily appreciate Don Knotts the way we did. Cast Jim Carrey in the Knotts role and Jack Black as his partner (originally played by Tim Conway), have them try to outdo each other’s slapstick performance, and you’ve got a huge family hit. The Black Cauldron (1985) This animated feature was so unpopular that it pretty much ruined the reputation of Walt Disney Pictures for a few years. Rated PG, and way too dark even for the studio that brought us Pinocchio, the adaptation of Lloyd Alexander’s fantasy novel had initially been threatened with a PG-13 or R rating. Nearly 25 years later, kids are a little tougher and could easily tolerate a live-action version that’s somewhere akin to Lord of the Rings, Pirates of the Caribbean and The Phantom Menace (a CGI “Gurgi” would be very similar to Jar-Jar Binks). Tim Burton should obviously direct the film, because he worked as an artist on the original, and he’s currently working for Disney anyway. The Cat from Outer Space (1978) Few people seem to hold this movie in high regards, despite audience’s apparent favor for talking animals and stupid sci-fi plots. But a modernized telling of a feline alien’s visit to Earth could be a blockbuster by being even worse than the original. Add more slapstick (in an LOLCats sort of way) and more special effects and this could make even more money than E.T., which seriously seemed derivative of The Cat from Outer Space anyway. And after this becomes a hit, Disney should continue digging in its catbox and remake the very strange and very obscure Three Lives of Thomasina. Darby O’Gill and the Little People (1959) If Hollywood can dare redo Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory, then Disney can surely remake Darby O’Gill and the Little People without too much protest. And like Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, this remake shall retain the source novel’s title. Of course, Darby O’Gill and the Good People does sound a little plain, so maybe getting right to the idea with Darby O’Gill and the Leprechauns as a title would be better. In any event, Sean Connery should come out of retirement to switch roles and play the titular old man who meets a bunch of Leprechauns. And perhaps Daniel Craig for Connery’s original role? Okay, new title: James Bond and the Other James Bond in Little People Are Forever (or Little People Never Die, or some other combo of 007 title referencing Leprechaun’s immortality). If this does well, Disney can also go ahead and redo the little-people-filled The Gnome-Mobile. In Search of the Castaways (1962) Here’s the genius idea Hollywood’s been seeking for almost 50 years: remake the Jules Verne adaptation In Search of the Castaways, a musical adventure with tons of disaster film elements and a perfect role for Miley Cyrus (isn’t she this generation’s Hayley Mills, in a way?), who could sing a new version of “Castaway.” The ice slide scene would be great in 3-D, by the way. Midnight Madness (1980) Remaking this cult classic might upset a few fans, but even those of us who love the original should be able to appreciate an updated version if it’s done right. There could always be more scavenger hunt movies, whether they’re fresh or recycled. And if Disney can find enough good, young character actors to fill the teams, nobody should even miss Eddie Deezen, David Naughton or Stephen Furst. Have Judd Apatow produce the thing and cast all his regulars, for instance. Paul Reubens (Pee-Wee Herman) should reprise his role, though. The Million Dollar Duck (1971) This family comedy about a duck that lays golden eggs is not very good, and it probably didn’t help its box office that a better film featuring golden-egg-laying fowl (Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory) opened on the very same day. But a good remake of bad movie isn’t a bad idea, and in this economy the story of a struggling family that gets a burst of financial luck (via strange science) might work as a relevant fantasy. Toby Tyler, or Ten Weeks with a Circus (1960) This forgotten Kevin Corcoran + monkey classic is kind of like Coraline, but there’s more circus stuff, the kid’s parents don’t suck (though he’s told they don’t love him), there’s a primate friend instead of a talking cat (though both animals are classic Disney devices) and it’s live-action and not 3-D. Do children still dream of running away to the circus? If not, then a remake of this movie could both reinstate that wish and present it as a terrible substitute for a real family all in the course of 90 minutes. The Ugly Dachshund (1966) Between the success of Marley and Me and news of an upcoming Marmaduke movie, it may just be the perfect time for a remake of a movie about a disastrous Great Dane who thinks he’s a little wiener dog. Put Brad Pitt and Anglina Jolie in the Dean Jones and Suzanne Pleshette roles and you’ll really, really piss off Team Jennifer by out-grossing last Christmas’ biggest hit. The World’s Greatest Athlete (1973) The story of an African who is brought to the U.S. to be a college track star may not seem like a big idea for a movie in the 21st century. But make that African a Tarzan-like white kid who can outrun a cheetah (and who isn’t The Flash) and you’ll have people laughing your film out of theaters. Or, you’ll somehow have a monster hit. Either way, we wish Disney would have the balls to remake this unrealistic movie, especially if they can get Usain Bolt to be the protagonist’s main competition. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2009/3/10/40940.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 3/10/2009 3:00:28 PM
Body: Last Friday, Hollywood Reporter broke the news that Fox will bring the comic strip Marmaduke to the big screen. One the one hand, this is baffling. The comic, a series of crudely rendered half-jokes, makes very little sense, and has no story whatsoever. The fact that Marmaduke is a mischievous great dane barely even qualifies as a premise. On the other hand, studios have sunk massive amounts of money into comic strip movies like Garfield and Dennis the Menace, and money-making dog movies like Marley & Me, which has earned $166 million worldwide since its Christmas ‘08 release. So Marmaduke might make economic sense, but it makes little sense otherwise. The green-lighting of this project is a peek into the bizarre minds of studio executives. If movies like Wall-E and the Harry Potter series bring home the bacon and earn critical acclaim, why empty the coffers for family tent-pole movies based on the crappiest of source material available? I have a theory. Just as Zack Snyder was goaded on by the allegedly “unfilmable” quality of the Watchmen graphic novel, the executives at Fox must see the production of a Marmaduke film as an act of artistic defiance. Let’s turn and unreadable comic into an unwatchable movie, they say, and laugh all the way to the bank when it destroys the competition at the box office! In that vein, I challenge the major studios to make the following comic strips into movies, just to see if people will pay to see the resulting crap. If they should choose to accept this challenge, may God help us all. Family Circus Bil Keane’s gentile tales of misspoken children and familial bliss have graced the funny pages for decades. They are never funny. At best, the panels hint at a vague Kids Say The Darndest Things kind of cuteness. At worst, they are astoundingly bland statements about how families are generally a good thing. In some ways, a Family Circus movie would be a safer bet than Marmaduke, due to better brand recognition. On second thought, the lack of a slobbering, CGI dog would be a strike against its box office chances. How it could actually work: Family Circus’s dopey simplicity and complete lack of self-awareness has made it the ideal fodder for parody. So far this has mostly existed on the internet, a few examples being Dysfunctional Family Circus, Scott Meets Family Circus, and the hilariously overwrought fake reviews that appeared on Amazon a few years ago. Of course Keane would never allow a vulgar distortion of his work to be made into a movie. If a straight-laced movie were made, however, I’m sure we could look forward to hilarious home-brew commentary tracks and endless trailer mash-ups. Cathy Cathy is a long-running strip about a woman dealing with “the four basic guilt groups,” defined by the strip’s creator, Cathy Guisewite, as Food, Love, Mom, and Work. For most of the comic’s runtime, it chronicled the foibles of being a single woman in the modern world. GoComics.com sums up the strip by saying, “She personifies the young career woman and her typical daily obstacles. Ice cream, panic attacks, stress and love are all in a day’s work.” But alas, Cathy and longtime boyfriend Irving were married in 2004. The wacky hi-jinks continue, however, now with biting commentary on modern relationships, i.e., “AAAACK! Men like iPods!” How it could actually work: While there would be something incredible about watching a frizzy-haried Renée Zellweger arguing with her mom and trying to resist the temptation of fudge for ninety minutes, there’s really only one way a Cathy movie could succeed. Two words: Andy Samberg. Hagar the Horrible A comic about a viking would seem to be ripe for a big-screen, action-packed film adaptation, except for the fact that the comic is mostly about Hagar bickering with his wife Helga and his hapless lieutenant, Lucky Eddie. The movie would be the perfect chance for Brendan Gleeson to squander his first leading role in a big-budget picture. How it could actually work: The world is hungry for a good viking movie, and Hagar the Horrible could provide the brand recognition needed. If Pirates of the Caribbean was able to build an entertaining and financially successful franchise from an amusement park ride, I don’t see why Haggar couldn’t do the same. A few things would be key: First of all, it has to be pretty violent, a PG-13 rating would be best. Also, the film would have to really delve into Hagar and Helga’s tense gender conflicts, which the comic only hints at. How does Hagar behave on long trips away from his overbearing wife, as his men rape and pillage? The Lockhorns There’s no way around it: a Lockhorns movie would be soul-crushingly depressing. The single panel comic satires marriage, showing the various squabbles of middle-aged couple Leroy and Loretta. While some optimistic fan has injected the Lockhorns‘ Wikipedia page with this ray of sunshine –– “Leroy and Loretta show how foolish it is to be unkind to the people we love” –– I don’t buy it. The comic is clearly about the inevitable misery of long-term relationships, and the futility of trying to find something better. Why don’t they get a divorce? They’ve covered that, it’s too expensive. Ugh. How it could actually work: In order to avoid making millions of children cry, the movie would have to spurn the young audience usually associated with comic strip movies. The Lockhorns could work as a dark comedy, with a heavy dose of gut-punching drama. It would delve into the relationship in the least sexy way possible, exposing layer after calloused layer. While I’d like to say that they learn to truly love one another in the end, that wouldn’t be true to the source material. The film would end with the two slowly drifting off to sleep on opposite ends of the couch after yet another petty argument, utterly resigned to their shared fate. Calvin and Hobbes Calvin and Hobbes is the Watchmen of comic strips, except more people have actually read it. The tales of mischievous young Calvin and his toy tiger Hobbes are the definitive love letter to the imagination for an entire generation. This comic makes the list not because it’s dopey and unfunny like the others, rather, it’s here because it’s so good. A movie of Calvin and Hobbes would almost certainly be a total disaster, bitterly offending millions. Why, you ask? Calvin and Hobbes is one of those comics where the genius is in the details. There’s nothing particularly interesting about a boy who pretends his toy tiger is alive. But Bill Watterson wrote a chemistry between the two that could not be replicated in another medium, or by another artist. How it could actually work: The only way a Calvin and Hobbes movie could possibly work is if they did it in the same way they did the Charlie Brown Specials. They would need to do a traditional hand-drawn animation, replicating the look of comic as much as possible. The voices would be hard to nail, but it would be doable. If the movie had too much of a plot, it would feel forced. Instead, it would follow Calvin and Hobbes through a series of small adventures: sledding, killing time in the back yard on a Saturday, making fun of Susie Derkins, all while making smart observations about life. The most important element of a successful Calvin and Hobbes movie would be this: Bill Watterson gets final cut. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Tue, 10 Mar 2009 19:00:28 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com3/10/2009 3:00:28 PMLast Friday, Hollywood Reporter broke the news that Fox will bring the comic strip Marmaduke to the big screen. One the one hand, this is baffling. The comic, a series of crudely rendered half-jokes, makes very little sense, and has no story whatsoever. The fact that Marmaduke is a mischievous great dane barely even qualifies as a premise. On the other hand, studios have sunk massive amounts of money into comic strip movies like Garfield and Dennis the Menace, and money-making dog movies like Marley & Me, which has earned $166 million worldwide since its Christmas ‘08 release. So Marmaduke might make economic sense, but it makes little sense otherwise. The green-lighting of this project is a peek into the bizarre minds of studio executives. If movies like Wall-E and the Harry Potter series bring home the bacon and earn critical acclaim, why empty the coffers for family tent-pole movies based on the crappiest of source material available? I have a theory. Just as Zack Snyder was goaded on by the allegedly “unfilmable” quality of the Watchmen graphic novel, the executives at Fox must see the production of a Marmaduke film as an act of artistic defiance. Let’s turn and unreadable comic into an unwatchable movie, they say, and laugh all the way to the bank when it destroys the competition at the box office! In that vein, I challenge the major studios to make the following comic strips into movies, just to see if people will pay to see the resulting crap. If they should choose to accept this challenge, may God help us all. Family Circus Bil Keane’s gentile tales of misspoken children and familial bliss have graced the funny pages for decades. They are never funny. At best, the panels hint at a vague Kids Say The Darndest Things kind of cuteness. At worst, they are astoundingly bland statements about how families are generally a good thing. In some ways, a Family Circus movie would be a safer bet than Marmaduke, due to better brand recognition. On second thought, the lack of a slobbering, CGI dog would be a strike against its box office chances. How it could actually work: Family Circus’s dopey simplicity and complete lack of self-awareness has made it the ideal fodder for parody. So far this has mostly existed on the internet, a few examples being Dysfunctional Family Circus, Scott Meets Family Circus, and the hilariously overwrought fake reviews that appeared on Amazon a few years ago. Of course Keane would never allow a vulgar distortion of his work to be made into a movie. If a straight-laced movie were made, however, I’m sure we could look forward to hilarious home-brew commentary tracks and endless trailer mash-ups. Cathy Cathy is a long-running strip about a woman dealing with “the four basic guilt groups,” defined by the strip’s creator, Cathy Guisewite, as Food, Love, Mom, and Work. For most of the comic’s runtime, it chronicled the foibles of being a single woman in the modern world. GoComics.com sums up the strip by saying, “She personifies the young career woman and her typical daily obstacles. Ice cream, panic attacks, stress and love are all in a day’s work.” But alas, Cathy and longtime boyfriend Irving were married in 2004. The wacky hi-jinks continue, however, now with biting commentary on modern relationships, i.e., “AAAACK! Men like iPods!” How it could actually work: While there would be something incredible about watching a frizzy-haried Renée Zellweger arguing with her mom and trying to resist the temptation of fudge for ninety minutes, there’s really only one way a Cathy movie could succeed. Two words: Andy Samberg. Hagar the Horrible A comic about a viking would seem to be ripe for a big-screen, action-packed film adaptation, except for the fact that the comic is mostly about Hagar bickering with his wife Helga and his hapless lieutenant, Lucky Eddie. The movie would be the perfect chance for Brendan Gleeson to squander his first leading role in a big-budget picture. How it could actually work: The world is hungry for a good viking movie, and Hagar the Horrible could provide the brand recognition needed. If Pirates of the Caribbean was able to build an entertaining and financially successful franchise from an amusement park ride, I don’t see why Haggar couldn’t do the same. A few things would be key: First of all, it has to be pretty violent, a PG-13 rating would be best. Also, the film would have to really delve into Hagar and Helga’s tense gender conflicts, which the comic only hints at. How does Hagar behave on long trips away from his overbearing wife, as his men rape and pillage? The Lockhorns There’s no way around it: a Lockhorns movie would be soul-crushingly depressing. The single panel comic satires marriage, showing the various squabbles of middle-aged couple Leroy and Loretta. While some optimistic fan has injected the Lockhorns‘ Wikipedia page with this ray of sunshine –– “Leroy and Loretta show how foolish it is to be unkind to the people we love” –– I don’t buy it. The comic is clearly about the inevitable misery of long-term relationships, and the futility of trying to find something better. Why don’t they get a divorce? They’ve covered that, it’s too expensive. Ugh. How it could actually work: In order to avoid making millions of children cry, the movie would have to spurn the young audience usually associated with comic strip movies. The Lockhorns could work as a dark comedy, with a heavy dose of gut-punching drama. It would delve into the relationship in the least sexy way possible, exposing layer after calloused layer. While I’d like to say that they learn to truly love one another in the end, that wouldn’t be true to the source material. The film would end with the two slowly drifting off to sleep on opposite ends of the couch after yet another petty argument, utterly resigned to their shared fate. Calvin and Hobbes Calvin and Hobbes is the Watchmen of comic strips, except more people have actually read it. The tales of mischievous young Calvin and his toy tiger Hobbes are the definitive love letter to the imagination for an entire generation. This comic makes the list not because it’s dopey and unfunny like the others, rather, it’s here because it’s so good. A movie of Calvin and Hobbes would almost certainly be a total disaster, bitterly offending millions. Why, you ask? Calvin and Hobbes is one of those comics where the genius is in the details. There’s nothing particularly interesting about a boy who pretends his toy tiger is alive. But Bill Watterson wrote a chemistry between the two that could not be replicated in another medium, or by another artist. How it could actually work: The only way a Calvin and Hobbes movie could possibly work is if they did it in the same way they did the Charlie Brown Specials. They would need to do a traditional hand-drawn animation, replicating the look of comic as much as possible. The voices would be hard to nail, but it would be doable. If the movie had too much of a plot, it would feel forced. Instead, it would follow Calvin and Hobbes through a series of small adventures: sledding, killing time in the back yard on a Saturday, making fun of Susie Derkins, all while making smart observations about life. The most important element of a successful Calvin and Hobbes movie would be this: Bill Watterson gets final cut. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/groups/Worst_Movie_Ever/Re_One_week_in_and_2009_sucks_already/104/39392/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: seely
Post To: Worst Movie Ever
Post Date: 1/12/2009 11:10:43 AM
Body: I'm a little disappointed but not all that surprised to hear Unborn wasn't any good. I kind of had high hopes for it, based mostly on the film poster. I did find a few lists of "films we're looking forward to" in 2009, but unfortunately they seemed to mostly be re-hashing familiar themes... [quote user="indieabby88"] [quote user="seely"] I don't know about you guys, but its one week in and 2009 is looking like another banner year for the Worst Movie Ever discussion fodder. So far, we have Paul Blart: Mall Cop (2009), where even the "making of" scenes were painful to watch. Karina, always the cynic, seems to agree as well with her latest blog post. And c'mon, Marley and Me is the top film? Followed by Bride Wars? Really? Ugh. I have a feeling this is going to be another disappointing year. Anyone else think so? Or are there any rays of light at the end of the dark tunnel that is the 2009 film year? [/quote] Have you seen Mark Kermode's review of "Bride Wars" on YouTube? It's pretty hysterical. I made the mistake of seeing The Unborn on Friday night. Pretty stinking awful. But hey, It's January. We've hit the lull period before things start to get interesting. I'm not prepared to give up hope yet. It's just not gonna be much fun to review movies for a couple of months. [/quote]
]]>Mon, 12 Jan 2009 16:10:43 GMTseelyWorst Movie Ever1/12/2009 11:10:43 AMI'm a little disappointed but not all that surprised to hear Unborn wasn't any good. I kind of had high hopes for it, based mostly on the film poster. I did find a few lists of "films we're looking forward to" in 2009, but unfortunately they seemed to mostly be re-hashing familiar themes... [quote user="indieabby88"] [quote user="seely"] I don't know about you guys, but its one week in and 2009 is looking like another banner year for the Worst Movie Ever discussion fodder. So far, we have Paul Blart: Mall Cop (2009), where even the "making of" scenes were painful to watch. Karina, always the cynic, seems to agree as well with her latest blog post. And c'mon, Marley and Me is the top film? Followed by Bride Wars? Really? Ugh. I have a feeling this is going to be another disappointing year. Anyone else think so? Or are there any rays of light at the end of the dark tunnel that is the 2009 film year? [/quote] Have you seen Mark Kermode's review of "Bride Wars" on YouTube? It's pretty hysterical. I made the mistake of seeing The Unborn on Friday night. Pretty stinking awful. But hey, It's January. We've hit the lull period before things start to get interesting. I'm not prepared to give up hope yet. It's just not gonna be much fun to review movies for a couple of months. [/quote] http://www.spout.com/groups/Worst_Movie_Ever/Re_One_week_in_and_2009_sucks_already/104/39356/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: indieabby88
Post To: Worst Movie Ever
Post Date: 1/11/2009 12:11:33 AM
Body: [quote user="seely"] I don't know about you guys, but its one week in and 2009 is looking like another banner year for the Worst Movie Ever discussion fodder. So far, we have Paul Blart: Mall Cop (2009), where even the "making of" scenes were painful to watch. Karina, always the cynic, seems to agree as well with her latest blog post. And c'mon, Marley and Me is the top film? Followed by Bride Wars? Really? Ugh. I have a feeling this is going to be another disappointing year. Anyone else think so? Or are there any rays of light at the end of the dark tunnel that is the 2009 film year? [/quote] Have you seen Mark Kermode's review of "Bride Wars" on YouTube? It's pretty hysterical. I made the mistake of seeing The Unborn on Friday night. Pretty stinking awful. But hey, It's January. We've hit the lull period before things start to get interesting. I'm not prepared to give up hope yet. It's just not gonna be much fun to review movies for a couple of months.
]]>Sun, 11 Jan 2009 05:11:33 GMTindieabby88Worst Movie Ever1/11/2009 12:11:33 AM[quote user="seely"] I don't know about you guys, but its one week in and 2009 is looking like another banner year for the Worst Movie Ever discussion fodder. So far, we have Paul Blart: Mall Cop (2009), where even the "making of" scenes were painful to watch. Karina, always the cynic, seems to agree as well with her latest blog post. And c'mon, Marley and Me is the top film? Followed by Bride Wars? Really? Ugh. I have a feeling this is going to be another disappointing year. Anyone else think so? Or are there any rays of light at the end of the dark tunnel that is the 2009 film year? [/quote] Have you seen Mark Kermode's review of "Bride Wars" on YouTube? It's pretty hysterical. I made the mistake of seeing The Unborn on Friday night. Pretty stinking awful. But hey, It's January. We've hit the lull period before things start to get interesting. I'm not prepared to give up hope yet. It's just not gonna be much fun to review movies for a couple of months. http://www.spout.com/groups/Worst_Movie_Ever/One_week_in_and_2009_sucks_already/104/39302/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: seely
Post To: Worst Movie Ever
Post Date: 1/9/2009 11:00:44 AM
Body: I don't know about you guys, but its one week in and 2009 is looking like another banner year for the Worst Movie Ever discussion fodder. So far, we have Paul Blart: Mall Cop (2009), where even the "making of" scenes were painful to watch. Karina, always the cynic, seems to agree as well with her latest blog post. And c'mon, Marley and Me is the top film? Followed by Bride Wars? Really? Ugh. I have a feeling this is going to be another disappointing year. Anyone else think so? Or are there any rays of light at the end of the dark tunnel that is the 2009 film year?
]]>Fri, 09 Jan 2009 16:00:44 GMTseelyWorst Movie Ever1/9/2009 11:00:44 AMI don't know about you guys, but its one week in and 2009 is looking like another banner year for the Worst Movie Ever discussion fodder. So far, we have Paul Blart: Mall Cop (2009), where even the "making of" scenes were painful to watch. Karina, always the cynic, seems to agree as well with her latest blog post. And c'mon, Marley and Me is the top film? Followed by Bride Wars? Really? Ugh. I have a feeling this is going to be another disappointing year. Anyone else think so? Or are there any rays of light at the end of the dark tunnel that is the 2009 film year? http://www.spout.com/groups/Weekly_Theme/Weekly_Theme_for_January_5_Man_s_Best_Friend/625/39132/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: mercurial
Post To: Weekly Theme
Post Date: 1/5/2009 9:14:36 PM
Body: As a cat person I've been told that I'm crazy, completely stupid, going to Hell, etc. It seems that the old saying that a dog is man's best friend reverberates strongly for a lot of people, so this week's theme is dedicated to that slobbering mess of fleas and fur: the dog. Was it the dog that made Marley & Me such a hit? Did you rent the latest Beethoven sequel? Somebody is watching them! Did Benji make you cry like a baby? Was Best in Show disturbingly bad or a work of genius? It's a new year so let's get it started with a bang, or rather, a bark!
]]>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 02:14:36 GMTmercurialWeekly Theme1/5/2009 9:14:36 PMAs a cat person I've been told that I'm crazy, completely stupid, going to Hell, etc. It seems that the old saying that a dog is man's best friend reverberates strongly for a lot of people, so this week's theme is dedicated to that slobbering mess of fleas and fur: the dog. Was it the dog that made Marley &amp; Me such a hit? Did you rent the latest Beethoven sequel? Somebody is watching them! Did Benji make you cry like a baby? Was Best in Show disturbingly bad or a work of genius? It's a new year so let's get it started with a bang, or rather, a bark! http://www.spout.com/groups/Coming_Soon/Holiday_movies_pt_II_Brad_Pitt_ages_backwards/216/38731/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: spout
Post To: Coming Soon
Post Date: 12/22/2008 4:49:21 PM
Body: Looks like Frost/Nixon finally opens wide on Christmas, but I'm still eagerly awaiting a wide release of The Wrestler. Meanwhile, here are some films that'll be everywhere on Christmas day: New Movies 12/25 Wide release 1. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button -- Watch the trailer. Read the review. The Curious Case of Mork and Mindy, er, Benjamin Button, headed Karina's list of The Most Disappointing Movies of 2008. That surprised me a little, considering the excellent cast. By the way, the studio tried to get Karina to take her review down. Hear the story in FilmCouch 98. 2. Valkyrie -- Watch the trailer. Based on a true story, Tom Cruise plays a German colonel who became part of a plot to assassinate Hitler. Cruise can play "intense" well enough, and he looks great in his eyepatch, but I've never been very interested in watching him play a hero. I think he's better suited to play suave villains (Collateral) and total creeps (Magnolia). 3. The Spirit -- Watch the trailer. Frank Miller gives Will Eisner's classic comic strip the Frank Miller treatment. My friend Kevin Buist (porcupine)saw it, and he thought it was extraordinarily bad. While most will agree that Miller's reinvention of Batman was inspired (I recommend the 1986 graphic novel The Dark Knight Returns), porcupine says Miller's mojo failed him in this re-imagining of the Spirit. Porcupine's review will appear this week on blog.spout.com. 4. Marley & Me -- Watch the trailer. Owen Wilson and Jennifer Aniston raise a troublesome golden retriever. What can I say? If you like dogs, you'll probably like this movie. 5. Bedtime Stories -- Watch the trailer. This Disney flick is the latest family comedy from Adam Sandler. It looks kind of like a more broadly comic Stranger Than Fiction (two kids are the authors of Sandler's life), but the trailer still makes me laugh some. Limited release 12/25 6. Revolutionary Road -- Watch the trailer. Kate Winslet and Leonardo DiCaprio together again, only this time it's the 1950s, they're married, and they feel stifled by their ordinary suburban lives. Looks really depressing and, just maybe...really good? 7. Waltz With Bashir -- Watch the trailer. Read the review. Based on true events, Ari Folman finds that he has almost no memories from Lebanon's 1982 invasion of Israel. Kevin Buist says in his review that it's like one part Waking Life, one part Schindler's List. I'm looking forward to it. 8. Last Chance Harvey -- Watch the trailer. Dustin Hoffman plays "Last Chance Harvey," a tired and desperate man. Then he meets Emma Thompson...
]]>Mon, 22 Dec 2008 21:49:21 GMTspoutComing Soon12/22/2008 4:49:21 PMLooks like Frost/Nixon finally opens wide on Christmas, but I'm still eagerly awaiting a wide release of The Wrestler. Meanwhile, here are some films that'll be everywhere on Christmas day: New Movies 12/25 Wide release 1. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button -- Watch the trailer. Read the review. The Curious Case of Mork and Mindy, er, Benjamin Button, headed Karina's list of The Most Disappointing Movies of 2008. That surprised me a little, considering the excellent cast. By the way, the studio tried to get Karina to take her review down. Hear the story in FilmCouch 98. 2. Valkyrie -- Watch the trailer. Based on a true story, Tom Cruise plays a German colonel who became part of a plot to assassinate Hitler. Cruise can play "intense" well enough, and he looks great in his eyepatch, but I've never been very interested in watching him play a hero. I think he's better suited to play suave villains (Collateral) and total creeps (Magnolia). 3. The Spirit -- Watch the trailer. Frank Miller gives Will Eisner's classic comic strip the Frank Miller treatment. My friend Kevin Buist (porcupine)saw it, and he thought it was extraordinarily bad. While most will agree that Miller's reinvention of Batman was inspired (I recommend the 1986 graphic novel The Dark Knight Returns), porcupine says Miller's mojo failed him in this re-imagining of the Spirit. Porcupine's review will appear this week on blog.spout.com. 4. Marley &amp; Me -- Watch the trailer. Owen Wilson and Jennifer Aniston raise a troublesome golden retriever. What can I say? If you like dogs, you'll probably like this movie. 5. Bedtime Stories -- Watch the trailer. This Disney flick is the latest family comedy from Adam Sandler. It looks kind of like a more broadly comic Stranger Than Fiction (two kids are the authors of Sandler's life), but the trailer still makes me laugh some. Limited release 12/25 6. Revolutionary Road -- Watch the trailer. Kate Winslet and Leonardo DiCaprio together again, only this time it's the 1950s, they're married, and they feel stifled by their ordinary suburban lives. Looks really depressing and, just maybe...really good? 7. Waltz With Bashir -- Watch the trailer. Read the review. Based on true events, Ari Folman finds that he has almost no memories from Lebanon's 1982 invasion of Israel. Kevin Buist says in his review that it's like one part Waking Life, one part Schindler's List. I'm looking forward to it. 8. Last Chance Harvey -- Watch the trailer. Dustin Hoffman plays "Last Chance Harvey," a tired and desperate man. Then he meets Emma Thompson... http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/11/17/37380.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 11/17/2008 5:00:58 PM
Body: Oprah Winfrey can certainly create a best seller when it comes to books, and her pick of the presidential candidates is on his way to the White House. But can she get behind a movie and contribute to its success? 20th Century Fox seems to hope so, because the studio apparently allowed the talk show host to screen an unfinished cut of Australia in preparation for her November 10 show, which featured the film’s stars, Nicole Kidman and Hugh Jackman, as well as a live-via-Skype call-in from filmmaker Baz Luhrman. Fortunately for Fox, Oprah raved about the film, and now the media has latched on to the endorsement, creating some much-needed positive buzz for the Oscar-hopeful. Yet there’s a big problem with all the excitement: Oprah’s film recommendations have hardly been sure-fire champs in the past. Case in point: the first title I came upon while searching for Oprah-select cinema was something called Christmas in the Clouds, a 2005 indie that she chose as her “must see holiday movie,” in O magazine a few years back. The film barely grossed a quarter-million dollars in theaters, but even if her endorsement didn’t occur until its DVD release in November 2006, there’s still no proof of popularity from the rental charts of the time, and two years later fewer than 250 people have rated it on IMDb (not the best for determining how many people have seen it, sure, but such a small number of votes is still somewhat revealing). As for awards recognition, well, it received the Audience Award at the 2001 Austin Film Festival, and it was named the best Native American-themed film the same year at the Santa Fe Film Festival, but the majority of Academy voters probably never even heard of it. Okay, so that is an extreme example of a film that had not even one percent of the marketing budget of Australia. So, let’s take a look at some of the bigger releases that Oprah has recommended more recently. Well, there is Michael Moore’s Sicko, which she labeled “the one movie you must see this summer,” a few weeks prior to its barely wide release in June 2007. Considering its theater count and its genre, the documentary’s final domestic gross of $24.5 million was quite an achievement, especially since only two other docs have grossed more (including Moore’s Fahrenheit 9/11, which will stay on top for quite awhile with its $119.1 million). Oh, and yes, Sicko earned an Oscar nomination, too. But did Oprah’s statement really have that much impact on Sicko’s success? What about all the other titles with Oprah connections that haven’t performed so well? Films based on her book club selections, from her inaugural title, The Deep End of the Ocean, to the recent adaptation of Love in the Time of Cholera, have rarely been blockbusters, and the three Academy nominations for House of Sand and Fog are hardly thanks to her love for and endorsement of that novel. Of course, film adaptations are not necessarily ever pegged to the praises of their source material, which is why Oprah’s name has not been linked to the expected Oscar contenders The Reader and The Road. Then there are the films she’s been directly involved with. Beloved, which she produced and starred in, earned a middling gross of $22.9 million. Its sole Oscar nomination was for costume design. Her more recent production, The Great Debaters, did a little better money-wise with $30.2 million, but it failed to garner the Academy’s attention. Ignoring the animated films she’s lent her voice to, you have to go back 23 years, long before she had the powers of influence she’s currently known for, to find something as big as Fox would like Australia to be. It was then that The Color Purple earned nearly $100 million and 11 Oscar nominations (none of which it won). As for films that Oprah simply promotes and recommends on her show, there is no clear certainty that she can influence either box office or the Oscars. She’s featured the casts from Crash and Brokeback Mountain, yet she’s also given time to publicize films like Alexander and Things We Lost in the Fire. Last week, after calling Australia “the film we needed to see,” she also helped to sell Marley & Me, a movie that might benefit slightly in increased ticket sales thanks to the appearances by Jennifer Aniston, yet there are no news reports mentioning anything but Aniston’s comments about her ex-husband. There’s likewise little media attention given to the fact that Oprah also apparently saw Seven Pounds, the Will Smith movie that, like Australia, has so far received no reviews. Was there no soundbite from Smith’s appearance earlier this month? Seven Pounds is also a mysterious Oscar contender with some needed positive buzz, though maybe Sony Pictures didn’t think to feed the press anything regarding Oprah’s connection to that film the way Fox has pushed them on the Australia endorsement. And what of Oprah’s praise anyway? She said, “I have not been this excited about a movie since I don’t know when.” How excited? And be more specific. Since forty years ago? Since Titanic? Since Christmas in the Clouds? Is this really the best movie of the year? Other than turning the expectations up a little higher following the recent negativity surrounding Australia, Oprah hasn’t really offered us anything except hope. So, a word to Fox: it’s about time you let the real critics see this alleged masterpiece so we can actually find out if this film has some real chances at an Oscar. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Mon, 17 Nov 2008 22:00:58 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com11/17/2008 5:00:58 PMOprah Winfrey can certainly create a best seller when it comes to books, and her pick of the presidential candidates is on his way to the White House. But can she get behind a movie and contribute to its success? 20th Century Fox seems to hope so, because the studio apparently allowed the talk show host to screen an unfinished cut of Australia in preparation for her November 10 show, which featured the film’s stars, Nicole Kidman and Hugh Jackman, as well as a live-via-Skype call-in from filmmaker Baz Luhrman. Fortunately for Fox, Oprah raved about the film, and now the media has latched on to the endorsement, creating some much-needed positive buzz for the Oscar-hopeful. Yet there’s a big problem with all the excitement: Oprah’s film recommendations have hardly been sure-fire champs in the past. Case in point: the first title I came upon while searching for Oprah-select cinema was something called Christmas in the Clouds, a 2005 indie that she chose as her “must see holiday movie,” in O magazine a few years back. The film barely grossed a quarter-million dollars in theaters, but even if her endorsement didn’t occur until its DVD release in November 2006, there’s still no proof of popularity from the rental charts of the time, and two years later fewer than 250 people have rated it on IMDb (not the best for determining how many people have seen it, sure, but such a small number of votes is still somewhat revealing). As for awards recognition, well, it received the Audience Award at the 2001 Austin Film Festival, and it was named the best Native American-themed film the same year at the Santa Fe Film Festival, but the majority of Academy voters probably never even heard of it. Okay, so that is an extreme example of a film that had not even one percent of the marketing budget of Australia. So, let’s take a look at some of the bigger releases that Oprah has recommended more recently. Well, there is Michael Moore’s Sicko, which she labeled “the one movie you must see this summer,” a few weeks prior to its barely wide release in June 2007. Considering its theater count and its genre, the documentary’s final domestic gross of $24.5 million was quite an achievement, especially since only two other docs have grossed more (including Moore’s Fahrenheit 9/11, which will stay on top for quite awhile with its $119.1 million). Oh, and yes, Sicko earned an Oscar nomination, too. But did Oprah’s statement really have that much impact on Sicko’s success? What about all the other titles with Oprah connections that haven’t performed so well? Films based on her book club selections, from her inaugural title, The Deep End of the Ocean, to the recent adaptation of Love in the Time of Cholera, have rarely been blockbusters, and the three Academy nominations for House of Sand and Fog are hardly thanks to her love for and endorsement of that novel. Of course, film adaptations are not necessarily ever pegged to the praises of their source material, which is why Oprah’s name has not been linked to the expected Oscar contenders The Reader and The Road. Then there are the films she’s been directly involved with. Beloved, which she produced and starred in, earned a middling gross of $22.9 million. Its sole Oscar nomination was for costume design. Her more recent production, The Great Debaters, did a little better money-wise with $30.2 million, but it failed to garner the Academy’s attention. Ignoring the animated films she’s lent her voice to, you have to go back 23 years, long before she had the powers of influence she’s currently known for, to find something as big as Fox would like Australia to be. It was then that The Color Purple earned nearly $100 million and 11 Oscar nominations (none of which it won). As for films that Oprah simply promotes and recommends on her show, there is no clear certainty that she can influence either box office or the Oscars. She’s featured the casts from Crash and Brokeback Mountain, yet she’s also given time to publicize films like Alexander and Things We Lost in the Fire. Last week, after calling Australia “the film we needed to see,” she also helped to sell Marley & Me, a movie that might benefit slightly in increased ticket sales thanks to the appearances by Jennifer Aniston, yet there are no news reports mentioning anything but Aniston’s comments about her ex-husband. There’s likewise little media attention given to the fact that Oprah also apparently saw Seven Pounds, the Will Smith movie that, like Australia, has so far received no reviews. Was there no soundbite from Smith’s appearance earlier this month? Seven Pounds is also a mysterious Oscar contender with some needed positive buzz, though maybe Sony Pictures didn’t think to feed the press anything regarding Oprah’s connection to that film the way Fox has pushed them on the Australia endorsement. And what of Oprah’s praise anyway? She said, “I have not been this excited about a movie since I don’t know when.” How excited? And be more specific. Since forty years ago? Since Titanic? Since Christmas in the Clouds? Is this really the best movie of the year? Other than turning the expectations up a little higher following the recent negativity surrounding Australia, Oprah hasn’t really offered us anything except hope. So, a word to Fox: it’s about time you let the real critics see this alleged masterpiece so we can actually find out if this film has some real chances at an Oscar. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/love/MemberTagFilms.aspxlove
Number of films tagged: 12477

Number of people who tagged: 336

Number of times used: 1476

]]>Tue, 08 Dec 2009 00:46:17 GMT124773361476Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/funny/MemberTagFilms.aspxfunny
Number of films tagged: 607

Number of people who tagged: 316

Number of times used: 940

]]>Tue, 08 Dec 2009 00:46:10 GMT607316940Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/family/MemberTagFilms.aspxfamily
Number of films tagged: 6288

Number of people who tagged: 226

Number of times used: 1138

]]>Thu, 03 Dec 2009 20:09:21 GMT62882261138Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/cute/MemberTagFilms.aspxcute
Number of films tagged: 210

Number of people who tagged: 98

Number of times used: 314

]]>Tue, 08 Dec 2009 00:46:12 GMT21098314Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/dog/MemberTagFilms.aspxdog
Number of films tagged: 1373

Number of people who tagged: 47

Number of times used: 161

]]>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 19:00:53 GMT137347161Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/puppy/MemberTagFilms.aspxpuppy
Number of films tagged: 155

Number of people who tagged: 15

Number of times used: 16

]]>Thu, 25 Jun 2009 07:12:48 GMT1551516Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/WTF/MemberTagFilms.aspxWTF
Number of films tagged: 24

Number of people who tagged: 15

Number of times used: 25

]]>Fri, 10 Jul 2009 03:50:48 GMT241525Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/golden/MemberTagFilms.aspxgolden
Number of films tagged: 3

Number of people who tagged: 4

Number of times used: 4

]]>Mon, 19 Jan 2009 11:57:50 GMT344Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/sale/MemberTagFilms.aspxsale
Number of films tagged: 2

Number of people who tagged: 2

Number of times used: 2

]]>Sun, 22 Mar 2009 22:09:32 GMT222Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/chew/MemberTagFilms.aspxchew
Number of films tagged: 1

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 1

]]>Sun, 22 Mar 2009 22:09:57 GMT111Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/clearance/MemberTagFilms.aspxclearance
Number of films tagged: 1

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 1

]]>Sun, 22 Mar 2009 22:09:32 GMT111Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/labrador/MemberTagFilms.aspxlabrador
Number of films tagged: 1

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 1

]]>Fri, 12 Dec 2008 16:04:33 GMT111Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/nothinghappen/MemberTagFilms.aspxnothinghappen
Number of films tagged: 1

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 1

]]>Sun, 04 Jan 2009 10:42:30 GMT111Tag